learningcommunity (FLC) with a local two-year institution to foster a collaborative community andsupport faculty in adopting APEX materials, which included helping them to consider, plan,apply, and reflect on effective practices for integrating computing into their courses. Buildingupon these pilot efforts, we are actively expanding adoption of the APEX program in severalways. First, we have begun holding summer and winter training workshops for faculty at severaladditional community colleges. Second, we are refining and improving the FLC experience aswe initiate new FLCs with these institutional partners. Finally, we will continue to assess theprogram’s efficacy through a research plan that evaluates student and faculty experiences,allowing us to optimize
State University, Mankato. She has a Ph.D. in Engineering Education, an M.S.Ed. in Curriculum and Instruction - Science Education, and a B.S. in Materials Science and Engineering.Dr. Michelle Soledad, Virginia Tech Michelle Soledad, Ph.D. is a Collegiate Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. Her research and service interests include teaching and learning experiences in fun- damental engineering courses, faculty development and support initiatives – including programs for the future engineering professoriate, and leveraging institutional data to support reflective teaching practices. She has degrees in Electrical Engineering (B.S., M.Eng.) from the Ateneo de Davao University
techniques. A few reasons could explain the results. One, as the students spend a disproportionateamount of time using analytical solutions, they are more likely to recall instances where theirknowledge was limited. Conversely, good programming technique is not utilized heavily in thecore curriculum, so they do not have the chance to continuously struggle with new material, andthus have an inflated sense of knowledge concerning the material. Another reason could be that,it is possible that the coding-heavy nature of the course enabled the students to remember goodprogramming practices, and this is reflected in the subsequent semesters. The lowest self-rating was given to the question “I can code my own numerical solutionsto PDEs
aims to encourage continuousimprovement in engineering and technology education and ensure that graduates have thenecessary knowledge and skills to meet industry and society's evolving needs.ABET accreditation holds significant value for students, faculty, and programs, as it proves thatthe program has met rigorous standards and is dedicated to providing quality education.Accreditation by ABET also offers recognition and professional development opportunities forgraduates.2.4. Service LearningService learning is an educational method that blends community service with academicinstruction, reflection on the service experience, and connecting it to personal and social growth.Its aim is to offer students practical opportunities to use their
;E Department.The school’s mission centers around empowering girls to be confident, intellectual, and ethicalleaders who advance the world. With the school’s mission in mind, the CS&E Departmentdefined a curricular scope and sequence aimed at introducing the various disciplines ofengineering, focusing on engineering as a “helping profession” and cultivating students’engineering habits of mind and identity. The focus of this paper is to zoom in on a 2nd gradelesson that reflects the goals of the CS&E curricular scope and sequence.At the Primary School level, which includes grades K-5, the pre-transformed curriculumenhanced students’ knowledge of and skills with block-based coding and robotics. Building onthis strength, and after a
University of Washington. Engineering education is her primary area of scholarship, and has been throughout her career. In her work, she currently focuses on the role of reflection in engineering student learning and the relationship of research and practice in engineering education. In recent years, she has been the co-director of the Consortium to Promote Reflection in Engineering Education (CPREE, funded by the Helmsley Charitable Trust), a member of the governing board for the International Research in Engineering Education Network, and an Associate Editor for the Journal of Engineering Education. Dr. Turns has published over 175 journal and conference papers on topics related to engineering education
. In Survey S4.2, students were asked how much they would like to sacrifice for a job position inthe renewable energy industry compared to a traditional company. Sacrifices on salary difference,driving distance, and driving time were given as response options with varying acceptance levels.The sacrifice levels are mapped to a 0-6 scale so that a maximum average score might reflect theirintention to sacrifice more for a renewable job option. The average score for this response is 3.67,indicating that they are willing to sacrifice their salary/driving distance/time to a reasonable extentfor a job in the renewable industry. Fig. 4 Survey response a) S5.1 on sacrifice for a job position in renewable energy whencompared with a traditional company
Abstract In order to inform a discussion of silenced communities within systemic processes, we examine the ASEE Diversity Recognition Program (ADRP) as a step towards amplifying re- flexive and critical activities already occurring within ASEE. In light of recent concern over the ADRP as a means of disrupting minority marginalization in Engineering Education1 , we reflect on the origins of the program as well as how to proactively shift the program’s cultural context to one of greater criticality about Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) in engineering, broadly. To investigate this more deeply, our research questions for this study were: What have other organizations used to anoint2 member
studies or of augmenting quantitativemethods with qualitative ones in the future. Examination of individual questions in the surveyinstrument hint at improvements in the ability to view problems holistically, consider others’thinking and manage anxiety. Changes in specific GSE and nAch questions may reflect arealization of the challenges presented by the entrepreneurship clients’ more realistic designproblems and by understanding the thinking of others. Factors such as age, presence of a closefamily member with engineering experience, and prior work in engineering significantly affectone or more regressions of nAch, GSE, and ToA values. Lower Initial (p = 0.026) and FinalnAch (p = 0.032) appear for students with prior work in engineering. Those
transfer status, both out of the school ofengineering and out of SW-PWI. The rosters also included students’ term grade point average(GPA) and term hours completed for Fall 2022, which were used as measures of academicoutcomes. Term hours completed refer to the credit hours that students passed and completed ina semester, and do not reflect students’ initial credit hour enrollment. We selected both GPA andterm hours completed as measurement metrics because SW-PWI uses these variables to measurestudent persistence and to predict students’ retention and graduation.Second, we requested and received access to a retention dashboard at SW-PWI. This dashboardcontains historical retention data both within the school of engineering and at the institution
questions measure the constructs as intended by the authors. However, themajority of validation studies in engineering education do not look at how items function forsubgroups of learners, particularly different racial, ethnic, and cultural groups [1]. Evenframeworks designed to improve the validity evidence provided regarding an assessment’s score,still leave out evaluations of fairness [2]–[4]. To gain a better understanding of how wellengineering assessment contexts are reflective of the diverse experiences of engineering studentsin the U.S., this work-in-progress paper explores the contexts of concept inventories from asociocultural perspective. The purpose of this WIP paper is to identify contexts that are used in three
be better. I felt like I was just correcting mathematical errors, perhaps this method will improve my scrutiny over time but it is hard to tell from one problem set.Students were similarly neutral to positive in their comments at the end of the semester, thoughfar fewer focused on the mechanics of working through the self-revision process. Most studentsfocused their comments instead on the outcomes of the process: The self-revised method reduced study time and helped me work through my thought process on mistakes, helping me to solidify how to overcome those particular problems. I was better able to reflect on my mistakes using this method. This is because, for the regular problem sets, I rarely look at
before submission oftheir “final” product [7]. This would be to the benefit of both faculty and students as it wouldreduce the burden on faculty to provide feedback to all students in a large group while alsoincreasing the feedback and timeliness of the feedback that students receive. Arguably for anassessment mechanism the most important factors considered are the reliability and validityof the assessment tool. The validity of ACJ refers to the validity of the rank-order that isproduced and is directly tied to the cohort of judges which is assembled [18]. The reliabilityof ACJ sessions is described by the Scale Separation Reliability (SSR) coefficient which, inthe context of comparative judgement, has strong indications that it reflects an
notstraightforward.In this study, the authors surveyed faculty teaching introductory courses in engineering toexplore the range of projects already developed, the basic details of the projects, and topicsaddressed in each. The online survey was utilized to collect faculty members’ teachingapproaches, preparation, activities, and materials needed, as well as self-reflection. Data analysiscategorized first-year engineering projects (N=32) by the project outcomes, themes, extentwithin the course coverage, grading system, institutions’ educational model, and the projects’inclusivity of other power/holistic skills. There were common features among the first-yearintroductory engineering courses including the engineering design process, teamwork, andprofessional
simulation is running in Tinkercad Circuits. However, the output in the serialmonitor will reflect whichever Arduino was selected at the beginning of the simulation start. Forexample, while interacting with the potentiometer, only the analog circuit (lower one in Fig. 2)will display output in the serial monitor. In contrast, if the student clicks on the upper arduinobefore clicking the StartSimulation button, s/he will notice the serial monitor starts displaying0 (the default digital output when push button is not pressed) on the serial monitor. As soon ass/he presses the push button, the serial monitor will print 1 and then go back to the default 0state.Graph Output: Tinkercad allows to visualize the circuit output data in graph format. Though
methodologies were examined within a large enrollmentcourse, it was concluded that students who selected their own teams earned grades that mirroredtheir overall course grade. Lower performing students who were randomly assigned, orpurposefully grouped with higher performing students based on previous performance, typicallyearned higher grades on the group assignment than other events in the course. However, theincreased grade in these cases did not consistently reflect improved individual performance.Keywords: team grading; team-based learning; team selection; group projects; assessment1. IntroductionGroup work, commonly referred to as cooperative learning [1], is an essential aspect of anundergraduate engineering experience because it is required to
other subjective measures like letters of recommendation and interviewsfor the admission process as the GRE quantitative score only measures a student’s ability whichaccounts for a fraction of graduate school success determinants. Rockinson-Szapkiw, Bray Jr,and Spaulding [6] in their study on the GRE score predictive validity in doctoral education alsodiscovered the GRE writing score to be a strong predictor for graduate students’ dissertationcompletion time.While these studies focused on various components of the GRE, evaluating their validity inpredicting factors postulated to reflect graduate school success, a more recent study by Newmanet al. [7] assessed issues with the GRE considering fairness for all demographic of applicants.They
, equity and inclusion (DEI). Simple exposure to adiverse environment in the classroom does not fully prepare students to succeed in a similar real-world environment.In order to best prepare students for post-graduation roles, we must incorporate DEI into ourcurriculum. Education in these issues promotes their awareness of the topic and allows them toexplore their own implicit bias in a safe environment. Practicing our teaching with similarthought, we must assess the student outcomes in a manner which is reflective of our ownunderstanding of these issues and aims to minimize performance gaps due to disparities betweenstudents.Systems Engineering is an ideal platform to promote student awareness of global inequities inthe world as well as explore
and in non-POGIL classes was even greater (87% vs 46%). This patternstayed relatively constant across instructors and the three sets of observations and reflectsPOGIL principles, which might be an indicant to construct validity.These preliminary findings were reflected in the student ratings. While ratings of the difficultyand length of POGIL and non-POGIL classes were similar (3.8 vs 4.0 on a scale of 1 “too easy”to 7 “too hard”; 4.0 vs 4.1 on a scale of 1 “too long” to 7 “too short”), students were much moreapt to rate the POGIL classes as more collaborative (5.8 vs 4.9), another POGIL principle. Againthere weren’t major differences across the three sets of observations. While there were expecteddifferences by instructor, there were minimal
which one’s self-efficacy belief is related to a specific situation or context.According to Bandura (1997), one’s self-efficacy is more accurately perceived when the contextis more specific. Accordingly, we adapted and created the ESE-E to reflect these threedimensions. In terms of the dimension of magnitude, the ESE-E scales included items that measuredentrepreneurial-related skills and activities at various difficulties, such as product ideation,business planning, and customer discovery. Furthermore, in terms of the dimension of generality,we adapted the items and created additional items based on the specific content topics taught inan entrepreneurship education course. In addition, in terms of the dimension of strength, eachESE-E
we draw inspiration from?or could not successfully leverage previously. • What can we do to personalize our actuator? • What are some steps we should take to test our brainstormed improvements?Materials needed• Bio-inspiration Worksheet (QR code)• Student actuators• Bio-Inspiration PresentationBefore• Gather photos/videos of animals and plants with useful features (ex: Giraffe tongue, crab claws, bird talons, webbed frog feet, elephant trunk)During• Display and discuss interesting features of plants and animals and how they allow for more mobility, grabbing, and strength.• Encourage students to reflect on the last
essential for developing an agile and adaptable mind in the 21st century, wheretechnology is ubiquitous. The importance of CT is reflected in the growing interest in exploringits potential role in various fields, including engineering. While CT in engineering education hasbeen discussed in previous research, there needs to be more understanding of how CT may differin the context of different engineering disciplines. Rich qualitative research on how studentsengage in CT and engineering can show how they can support each other [5]. Research has beenconducted to investigate the implementation of CT in middle school education internationally.The studies emphasize the importance of CT in interdisciplinary education to foster students'critical thinking
training in a specifictool area, participants are assessed using the corresponding rubric. This enables trainers andadministrators to gauge the level of competency of each participant and identify areas ofimprovement. The structure of the training program varied for each community, reflecting thefacilitator's approach and the specific equipment utilized. For example, the textiles communityfollowed a highly structured format with three weeks of co-learning sessions organized aroundshort practice projects, followed by three weeks dedicated to open-ended individual projects. Thewoodshop community took a more unstructured approach, providing “just-in-time” trainingwhile diving into open-ended individual projects from the first week
bridge the skills required forboth. This article explores the role of using Mind Mapping in lecture-based courses toconnect with the knowledge of hands-on courses. During Fall 22, researchers used mindmapping in 4 courses of construction III (62 junior students) and 1 course of ConstructionsI (18 sophomore students). This study analyses the outcome of students’ performance interms of the knowledge highlighted in their mind maps and the application in their exams.Finally, instructors conducted a survey to inquire students about their perception about therole mind mapping plays in their learning and course performance. The authors reflect onthe design of the intervention and explore the avenues academia could take to form newpedagogical approaches
are those of the author(s)and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] Schubert, K., & Delgado Solorzano, X., & Massey, L., & Gattis, C., & Popp, J., & Cao, C., & Carter, T., & Muralidhara, D. (2022, August), A Successful 2-week Innovation- and Student Success-Focused Bridge Program for First-Year Students. Paper presented at 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN. https://peer.asee.org/42080[2] https://honorscollege.uark.edu/prospective-students/path-program/index.php[3] Schubert, K. D., & Moergen, K. N., & Gattis, C. S., & Lo, W. (2020, June), Integrating Innovation Curriculum: Measuring Student Innovation to
groups of individuals cannot exist without a mixture of critical andempathetic reasoning: “rational reflection would not be able to provide us with the imaginarypower that we need to envisage future scenarios and to take part in other people’s perspectivesand to evaluate their destinies” (p. 106).STEM and Empathy. Through emotional reflection, STEM professionals come to decisions abouthow their choices affect individuals beyond themselves. STEM curriculum alone often fails toteach this important concept [25-27]. Humanities instruction may be key to supporting thesetypes of reflections. Prior research indicates that interdisciplinary and holistic approaches may bemore effective than traditional programs in developing empathy [28-30]. Through
, allowing them to take ownership of their learning and pursue their interests. • Authentic assessment: Students are assessed based on the quality of their final product, as well as their ability to reflect on the learning process and apply what they have learned to other contexts. Senior project/capstone experiences have long used PBL. However, we are interested inrevisiting the topic to ensure that the course also follows inquiry-based learning, a corecomponent of PBL. At CSUB, senior project/capstone experiences in the department follow asoftware-development paradigm like the waterfall method. The teacher and students select aproduct of some significance. They define a project, set goals, and work on sub-goals over
agreed on three guiding principles (a) Update the SET instrument to makeit a more useful instrument for faculty development; (b) Include items that capture studentperceptions of class climate; (c) Broaden the scope of teaching behaviors assessed to reflect thebroad range of course structures and effective teaching styles of our faculty.The Committee researched and compared the SET standards and processes at OU to peer andaspirant institutions. As part of this research, we examined best practices for preventing bias inresponses from students. We note that none of OUs peer and aspirant schools are using paper-and-pencil SET data collection processes. Benchmarking information and best-practice insights weregleaned for both the solicitation of
be defined as: A credit-bearing educational experience in which students participate in an organized service activity that meets identified community needs and reflects on the service activity in such a way as to gain further understanding of course content, a broader appreciation of the discipline, and an enhanced sense of civic responsibility [10, p. 222].Although primarily associated with disaster recovery, several examples show the potentialities ofservice learning methodology in disaster education [11]–[13].Guided by the service learning methodology, we designed a course in which students graduallymove from players to facilitators of the DIG. The course starts with the theoretical and empiricalaspects of
can be done through a course that focuses on teaching the conceptsand skills, or it can be embedded within the engineering classroom experience. For example, areview of growth mindset approaches identified effective interventions including courses andother learning experiences like workshops, discussions, reflective writing, online tutorials, andcourse-embedded tutors [10]. Metacognitive strategies are also commonly taught outside theclassroom through campus teaching and learning centers. There is an emerging focus onmetacognition and self-regulated learning embedded within STEM classrooms [14], [15], [16].Proactive identification and advising of studentsProactive advising, built on the concept of intrusive advising [17], [18], involves